http://www.thespec.com/whatson-story/7344380-janet-jackson-to-make-fly-on-the-wall-documentary-/#.WS7NWs2B2hM.twitter

I'd watch it.

I'm down for the cause. She has never done anything like this before. Come own girl bring it!!

HAPPYPERSON said:

A source explained: "Janet has been fiercely private about her life in the past but feels the need to keep her fans in the loop with what life has been like since she went into hiatus ten years ago."

So... That hiatus included two albums, three tours, three movies and a multitude of TV appearences? Alright.

[Edited 5/31/17 22:01pm]

Money must be tight!

Dasein said:

Money must be tight!

This is a juvenile ideology and lacks forethought or insight. Let's examine.

Madonna has done a documentary twice about her tours (Truth or Dare about Blond Ambition, and I'm Going To Tell You A Secret about Re-Invention Tour). Was she tight on money?
George Michael filmed a documentary about Listen Without Prejudice, and had a documentary about the TwentyFive Live tour. Was he tight on money?

Why is it a default go-to that people are hard up for money when they do something like this? A lot of artists will film stuff like this. The fact that hers is going to be a limited series on Netflix is only a good thing for everyone. Janet is fiercely private but has made huge steps in being public and honest with her fanbase in the last couple of years, more so than ever before. When the teaser for "No Sleeep" came out, she said then that anything about her we'd hear directly from her lips, no other source.

Janet is one of the few artists to not do some sort of documentary around a tour. All For You Live In Hawaii had some backstage stuff in between songs, but that was it. There was no album documentaries per se, or making of the album documentaries. There was some dance rehearsal footage for the janet. album, and it was great. But it wasn't a day-to-day life sorta documentary.

An artist deserves to get paid for their art. If she chooses to have it filmed, so be it. But to have the pedestrian attitude of "oh, she must need money" is just ill-conceived. The woman has sold a gazillion records. Unbreakable debuted at #1 on the Billboard 200. On an indie label. Since Control she's only had two records not make it to #1 (they were #2, by the way). She has cash on top of cash. Unlike her brother, she's been a lot smarter with her money. You never hear about her living overtly lavishly, going on spending sprees at a Vegas mall, or even a bankruptcy rumor. I hope she learned from MJ's careless finances, and will forever have a nest to rest on. But the Netflix series is part of her being a public person. This isn't going to be the Real Housedancers of State Of the World Tour or something equally dismal.

Note, I'm not saying you are pedestrian - the idea is pedestrian. That is what I'm challenging; the idea.

HatrinaHaterwitz said:

I'd watch it.

I'm soooooo there.

TrivialPursuit said:

HatrinaHaterwitz said:

I'd watch it.

I'm soooooo there.

TrivialPursuit said:

Dasein said:

Money must be tight!

This is a juvenile ideology and lacks forethought or insight. Let's examine.

Madonna has done a documentary twice about her tours (Truth or Dare about Blond Ambition, and I'm Going To Tell You A Secret about Re-Invention Tour). Was she tight on money?
George Michael filmed a documentary about Listen Without Prejudice, and had a documentary about the TwentyFive Live tour. Was he tight on money?

Why is it a default go-to that people are hard up for money when they do something like this? A lot of artists will film stuff like this. The fact that hers is going to be a limited series on Netflix is only a good thing for everyone. Janet is fiercely private but has made huge steps in being public and honest with her fanbase in the last couple of years, more so than ever before. When the teaser for "No Sleeep" came out, she said then that anything about her we'd hear directly from her lips, no other source.

Janet is one of the few artists to not do some sort of documentary around a tour. All For You Live In Hawaii had some backstage stuff in between songs, but that was it. There was no album documentaries per se, or making of the album documentaries. There was some dance rehearsal footage for the janet. album, and it was great. But it wasn't a day-to-day life sorta documentary.

An artist deserves to get paid for their art. If she chooses to have it filmed, so be it. But to have the pedestrian attitude of "oh, she must need money" is just ill-conceived. The woman has sold a gazillion records. Unbreakable debuted at #1 on the Billboard 200. On an indie label. Since Control she's only had two records not make it to #1 (they were #2, by the way). She has cash on top of cash. Unlike her brother, she's been a lot smarter with her money. You never hear about her living overtly lavishly, going on spending sprees at a Vegas mall, or even a bankruptcy rumor. I hope she learned from MJ's careless finances, and will forever have a nest to rest on. But the Netflix series is part of her being a public person. This isn't going to be the Real Housedancers of State Of the World Tour or something equally dismal.

Note, I'm not saying you are pedestrian - the idea is pedestrian. That is what I'm challenging; the idea.

Receipts handed!!!

Dasein said:

TrivialPursuit said:

Dasein said:

Money must be tight!

This is a juvenile ideology and lacks forethought or insight. Let's examine.

Madonna has done a documentary twice about her tours (Truth or Dare about Blond Ambition, and I'm Going To Tell You A Secret about Re-Invention Tour). Was she tight on money?
George Michael filmed a documentary about Listen Without Prejudice, and had a documentary about the TwentyFive Live tour. Was he tight on money?

Why is it a default go-to that people are hard up for money when they do something like this? A lot of artists will film stuff like this. The fact that hers is going to be a limited series on Netflix is only a good thing for everyone. Janet is fiercely private but has made huge steps in being public and honest with her fanbase in the last couple of years, more so than ever before. When the teaser for "No Sleeep" came out, she said then that anything about her we'd hear directly from her lips, no other source.

Janet is one of the few artists to not do some sort of documentary around a tour. All For You Live In Hawaii had some backstage stuff in between songs, but that was it. There was no album documentaries per se, or making of the album documentaries. There was some dance rehearsal footage for the janet. album, and it was great. But it wasn't a day-to-day life sorta documentary.

An artist deserves to get paid for their art. If she chooses to have it filmed, so be it. But to have the pedestrian attitude of "oh, she must need money" is just ill-conceived. The woman has sold a gazillion records. Unbreakable debuted at #1 on the Billboard 200. On an indie label. Since Control she's only had two records not make it to #1 (they were #2, by the way). She has cash on top of cash. Unlike her brother, she's been a lot smarter with her money. You never hear about her living overtly lavishly, going on spending sprees at a Vegas mall, or even a bankruptcy rumor. I hope she learned from MJ's careless finances, and will forever have a nest to rest on. But the Netflix series is part of her being a public person. This isn't going to be the Real Housedancers of State Of the World Tour or something equally dismal.

Note, I'm not saying you are pedestrian - the idea is pedestrian. That is what I'm challenging; the idea.

. . . and this silly post which makes an attempt to pass itself off as being "deep" is just as goofy
as mine was. You have no idea what you're talking about, Trivial, because I am 99% sure that
you are not privy to Janet Jackson's finances. It is not "ill-conceived" to think a recording artist
is making a documentary solely because her pockets ain't what they used to be. It's called "show-
business," not "artists bleeding for the sake of art and giving away their wares for free."

BlackCat1985 said:

Dasein said:

Money must be tight!

In that case it would have made more sense to stay with her wealthy husband. Janet has always been smart about her money. Notice you never hear about her having money troubles or not paying her people. Most of the Jacksons have had money troubles.... But NOT Janet. She is doing this for her fans.... And it's about damn time!

. . . you're another one who is opining as if you know the status of her relationship with her ex
husband and the same with her finances when you really don't.

Don't let your idol-worship render you completely devoid of humor.

Dasein said:

. . . and this silly post which makes an attempt to pass itself off as being "deep" is just as goofy
as mine was. You have no idea what you're talking about, Trivial, because I am 99% sure that...

Dasein said:

You Janet stans have a habit of mocking and making fun of other Jacksons in order to boost up Janet. Why do you bring up other people that have nothing to do with Janet in her threads? Yall bring up Madonna too. You don't have to do that in every thread, its childish because there are a lot of things one can say about Janet, she is not perfect herself. As far as the article, I will wait and see until more info comes out.

[Edited 6/3/17 8:33am]

mjscarousal said:

JanFan said:

mjscarousal said:

You Janet stans have a habit of mocking and making fun of other Jacksons in order to boost up Janet. Why do you bring up other people that have nothing to do with Janet in her threads? Yall bring up Madonna too. You don't have to do that in every thread, its childish because there are a lot of things one can say about Janet, she is not perfect herself. As far as the article, I will wait and see until more info comes out.

[Edited 6/3/17 8:33am]

Janet fans do have a habit of tearing down other artists to boost her up. And this goes beyond Michael or Madonna. They do it with artits like Beyoncé as well. However, I will say that there are TONS of threads and comments that have been made on here in which posters have torn Janet down in favor of other artists. Many on here put down her talent and discredit her as an artist by saying she'd be nowhere without Michael. Then when Janet fans push back their slams, the rebuttal is that Janet fans are somehow obsessed with her and that we believe everyone should worship her. Constructive criticism is one thing, but she gets blatant hate in here for absolutely no reason. This happens most frequently whenever Janet fans post an article in which she's being praised. It's clear this forum has a very elitist attitude when it comes to music. Almost all pop stars are bashed on here and called manufactured because they don't play a thousand instruments like Prince did. I won't deny that Janet fans don't bring up other artists to boost her up, but you also can't deny that the same isn't done to her.

I am ALWAYS defending Janet on this site and I have ALWAYS mentioned how the org unnecessarily trash her, however, in saying that does not negate the fact that Janet stans are always bringing up MJ in her threads to trash him. It needs to stop.

Also, I disagree with you about the org being elistist. It def was in the past but not anymore. This site is kinda a joke now. Orgers are always fawning over Beyonce, The Weekend, Kanye, etc in this section so I definitly would not call this site elitist but I DO agree that this site has a irrational disdain toward the Jacksons, MJ and Janet specifically.

[Edited 6/3/17 16:08pm]

Free2BMe said:

YES, Janet fans are known for tearing other artist down to boost Janet up. They especially like to bring up Michael. At least two JJ fans have brought up Michael concerning Janet's "wealth" in this thread.Of course, their assertions were full of bullshit about Michael. There was no reason to bring Michael into this thread, except to try and boost Janet up.

You mean like their claim that Michael turned down Janet's vocals on Scream?

bluegangsta said:

Free2BMe said:

YES, Janet fans are known for tearing other artist down to boost Janet up. They especially like to bring up Michael. At least two JJ fans have brought up Michael concerning Janet's "wealth" in this thread.Of course, their assertions were full of bullshit about Michael. There was no reason to bring Michael into this thread, except to try and boost Janet up.

You mean like their claim that Michael turned down Janet's vocals on Scream?

Even Janet questioned that in interviews, and it was different on later issues of the record. Whether it was an anomaly early on or not - it was different later.

bluegangsta said:

Free2BMe said:

YES, Janet fans are known for tearing other artist down to boost Janet up. They especially like to bring up Michael. At least two JJ fans have brought up Michael concerning Janet's "wealth" in this thread.Of course, their assertions were full of bullshit about Michael. There was no reason to bring Michael into this thread, except to try and boost Janet up.

You mean like their claim that Michael turned down Janet's vocals on Scream?

Yea they claim a lot of things that are delusions and it is all rooted in insecurities.

TrivialPursuit said:

bluegangsta said:

You mean like their claim that Michael turned down Janet's vocals on Scream?

Even Janet questioned that in interviews, and it was different on later issues of the record. Whether it was an anomaly early on or not - it was different later.

Nope. The mix has been consistent on every repress and single version.

[Edited 6/3/17 21:06pm]

bluegangsta said:

No official sources for this yet.

bluegangsta said:

TrivialPursuit said:

Even Janet questioned that in interviews, and it was different on later issues of the record. Whether it was an anomaly early on or not - it was different later.

Nope. The mix has been consistent on every repress and single version.

Based on what Jimmy Jam and Janet have said, I'll disagree with you. I'm not saying MJ lowered or changed anything. I'm saying Jam and Janet have both noted her vocals on that song not being where they should early on.